Gish Gallop
Armondikov (Talk | contribs) |
|||
| Line 15: | Line 15: | ||
===Examples=== | ===Examples=== | ||
| − | [[Philip J. Rayment]] has been making full use of the Gish Gallop technique over on [[A Storehouse of Knowledge]]. He has improved the technique even further by introducing an annoying green "quote template" to further fragment discussion.<ref>[http://www.astorehouseofknowledge.info/index.php?title=Talk:Evolution&curid=287&diff=27128&oldid=27121 a fine example of Gish Galloping]</ref>. | + | The following show prime examples of the "gish gallop". They are usually characterized by being "lists", titled "100 reasons why..." or similar. It takes a lot of effort to fully refute everything, which is the point behind the tactic. |
| + | |||
| + | *[[Ask Darwinists]] | ||
| + | *[[Talk:Christian Science]] | ||
| + | *[[101 evidences for a young age of the earth and the universe]] | ||
| + | *[http://www.dailyexpress.co.uk/posts/view/146138 100 reasons that climate change is natural] | ||
| + | |||
| + | [[YEC]] website owner [[Philip J. Rayment]] has been making full use of the Gish Gallop technique over on [[A Storehouse of Knowledge]]. He has improved the technique even further by introducing an annoying green "quote template" to further fragment discussion.<ref>[http://www.astorehouseofknowledge.info/index.php?title=Talk:Evolution&curid=287&diff=27128&oldid=27121 a fine example of Gish Galloping]</ref>. | ||
==See also== | ==See also== | ||
*[[JAQing off]] is another strategy. | *[[JAQing off]] is another strategy. | ||
| + | *[[PRATT]] | ||
*[[FUD]] | *[[FUD]] | ||
*[[Ham Hightail]] | *[[Ham Hightail]] | ||
*[[Dinesh D'Souza]] | *[[Dinesh D'Souza]] | ||
| − | |||
| − | |||
==External links== | ==External links== | ||
| Line 31: | Line 37: | ||
==Footnotes== | ==Footnotes== | ||
<references/> | <references/> | ||
| + | |||
[[Category:Bullshit]] | [[Category:Bullshit]] | ||
[[Category:Entry point]] | [[Category:Entry point]] | ||
[[Category:Evaluating arguments]] | [[Category:Evaluating arguments]] | ||
{{Logical fallacy}} | {{Logical fallacy}} | ||
Revision as of 17:16, 15 December 2009
Named for creationism activist and professional debater Duane Gish, the Gish Gallop is an informal name for a rhetorical technique in debates that involves drowning the opponent in half-truths, lies, straw men, and bullshit to such a degree that the opponent cannot possibly answer every falsehood that has been raised.
Contents |
Spurious argument from authority
It is often used as an indirect argument from authority, as it often appears to paint the "galloper" as an expert in a broad range of subjects and the opponent as an incompetent bumbler who didn't do their homework before the debate. (Such emphasis on style over substance is why many scientists disdain public debates as a forum for disseminating opinions.)
Use by creationists
The evolution of living organisms is a large and complex subject, and even professionals cannot study more than a small part of it during their whole careers. Since many debates involve a three quarter hour presentation with a half hour rebuttal, correcting all the Creationist misinformation under these conditions is difficult or impossible. Generally creationists are more than willing to debate when the debating rules favor them in this way.
| Since they have no scientific model of their own to present, they will spend all of their time in what is known affectionately as the "Gish Gallop", in which they skip around from topic to topic spewing out an unceasing blizzard of baloney and unsupported assertions about evolutionary theory, leaving the poor evolutionist to attempt to catch up and correct them all.[1] |
Where possible it is best to
| ...narrow the debate down to a single topic--the age of the earth, or the fossil record--and then debate it through to its logical conclusion. This defeats the Gish Gallop, and also prevents the common creationist tactic of suddenly changing the subject whenever he gets uncomfortable.[1] |
It is also important to challenge creationists whenever they make unsupported claims.
Use by bloggers
A variant of the Gish Gallop is employed by bloggers who post an endless series of dubious assertions - each of which can be countered, but to no effect, as it will be buried under the cascade of dubious posts.
Examples
The following show prime examples of the "gish gallop". They are usually characterized by being "lists", titled "100 reasons why..." or similar. It takes a lot of effort to fully refute everything, which is the point behind the tactic.
- Ask Darwinists
- Talk:Christian Science
- 101 evidences for a young age of the earth and the universe
- 100 reasons that climate change is natural
YEC website owner Philip J. Rayment has been making full use of the Gish Gallop technique over on A Storehouse of Knowledge. He has improved the technique even further by introducing an annoying green "quote template" to further fragment discussion.[2].
See also
- JAQing off is another strategy.
- PRATT
- FUD
- Ham Hightail
- Dinesh D'Souza
External links
- How Not To Argue With Creationists by Jim Lippard
- Debating Creationists: Some Pointers -- two articles at TalkOrigins.org
Footnotes
- ↑ 1.0 1.1 http://www.geocities.com/CapeCanaveral/Hangar/2437/debate2.htm
- ↑ a fine example of Gish Galloping
| Articles about logical fallacies | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Formal fallacies | |||||
| Affirming the consequent | Denying the antecedent | ||||
| Informal fallacies | |||||
| Red herrings | |||||
| Conditional fallacies | |||||
| Fallacious argument styles | |||||
|
Gish Gallop |
|||||